If a woman lies about being on the pill, is it rape by deception?

Wiki - Rape by deception

Rape by deception is a crime in which the perpetrator has the victim's sexual consent and compliance, but gains it through deception or fraudulent statements or actions.

Rape by fraud? N.J. lawmaker introduces bill to make it a crime

This happened to me many years ago, so it is a serious question, although some may not like it.
Boy meets girl, girl and boy are close to having sex, boy says "I don't have any condoms" girl replies "It's cool, I'm on the pill", but that was a total lie.

I would not have consented to sex if I knew there was zero protection from pregnancy.
I did not want another child so my consent for sex would only be if using barrier protection and/or the girl was using contraceptive drugs such as the pill or implants.
Key point, MY CONSENT to sex depended solely on the use of contraception to reduce the risk of a child being conceived.
She lied, and it turned out she was already pregnant from last weekend's guy, but after more lies she moved in with me and I raised the child as my own for 7 years, even after the DNA test when he was born showed he was not mine.

Now I'm not bitching about any of it, life is life, and we make our own mistakes, so please take away any comments like "It takes two to tango" or "You shouldn't have had sex with someone you don't know" or whatever. All that is irrelevant to the OP.

This thread is solely about rape by deception, and I'm interested in thoughts about that, not moral hand wringing about casual sex. The girl admitted to me that she straight out lied that night so rest assured there is no confusion in my story.
I would not have had sex with the girl that night if she had said it would involve zero contraception. No arguments, no misunderstandings, if she had said to me that night in her bed that she was not on the pill (when I asked her) we would not have had sex.
I did not want another child, and I thank science for DNA tests because she probably would have lied that the child was mine.

So ATS, was I a victim of rape by deception?
I would not have consented if she had told me the truth.

I don't think it qualifies as rape myself.

38 years ago a woman was on birth control pills and found out 3 months into a pregnancy that she was pregnant. She had not missed a pill, nor taken any medication that would make the pill any less potent for its purpose.

As I'm typing to you, that baby that was a surprise and born 3 months early was me.

So no. I don't see it as rape as the only way to be 100% sure that no baby will enter this world is abstinence or have it at such an old age that it's impossible to get pregnant.

It was a dirty, foul, despicable thing she did to you of course, but still not rape IMO. As there was still a chance she could have gotten pregnant had she originally been telling the truth. I'm living, breathing proof that "oopsies" can and do occur even when precautions are taken correctly.

a reply to: grainofsand

I sure do wish government was more involved in everybody's sex lives.

Dunno...
Maybe.

I thought that was for STDs and things like AIDS...

But yours is also a deception.
It may well be.

Rape by deception, even if it is discussed and consensual? Never heard of this concept, and it seems like an odd logic. And this is proposed to become a law? An odd duck of a law concept, this.

a reply to: Kangaruex4Ewe

So you disagree with rape by deception claims?
My consent was solely on the grounds that contraception was used, she lied.

I am in two minds about the whole 'rape by deception' thing myself, but if it is a 'thing' then my example surely meets the criteria.

Do you disagree with 'rape by deception' in general, or just my example?

originally posted by: Aleister
Rape by deception, even if it is discussed and consensual? Never heard of this concept, and it seems like an odd logic. And this is proposed to become a law? An odd duck of a law concept, this.

I know, it is curious, but it got me thinking after reading about it, and it of course works both ways, if indeed it is a 'thing'.

Sounds like a civil matter to me.

Maybe if the person in question didn't want to risk a pregnancy, then they shouldn't have had sex. Even IF there was observed birth control involved, those methods could fail, and then where would the person be? What kind of rape would it be then and who would the person blame for their own consensual decision?

No one made the person have sex except for the person in question in this scenario.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
Sounds like a civil matter to me.

It is a criminal matter in Israel.

a reply to: ketsuko

Behave, my consent was solely on the use of contraceptives. She lied.
Had she told the truth I would not have consented.
The reliability of the particular contraception is irrelevant, my consent was based on her statement that she was using a contraceptive. It was deception.

It sure is deception but it is certainly not 'rape'. You have been duped, tricked, cheated; but nobody forced you to have sex without consent.
I find this OP a little tasteless as it puts rape on par with conning.
One is an actual attack on your body, a violation of the worst kind, the other is a pain in the ass but nothing that might not turn out to be the best thing that ever happened to you - unlike rape.

a reply to: grainofsand

I would most likely disagree with it inmost any case. There are reasons we don't have sex with folks that we meet at the bowling alley at last call. I'm certainly Not judging anyone who chooses to romp around a bit whenever they choose, but that's where the consequences lay it seems. If we still dated for a period of time (longer than a double feature and Pizza Hut) we would get to know those people that we intended to sleep with. We would know (usually) whether they were capable of such deceit or not. Instead we go out on one nighters, blind dates, etc. and hit the sack as soon as the urge hits us and then we wonder how come we didn't know they really weren't on the pill, they really weren't a crackhead, they really weren't Dahmer in a dress, etc.

I know these things can happen even when we think we know people, but that is a risk we all take when we are dealing with humans. They have the capacity to lie about things like that and maybe if we aren't 100% sure that someone wouldn't do that... Then maybe we really shouldn't be willing to engage in intercourse with them. I could think of far worse things to get than a baby if one dwells on it long enough. Aids, herpes, etc. are all risks we take every time we sleep with someone that we do not know 100%.

Again... No judgement from me on how anyone handles their love life. Just stating the obvious that maybe we should take the time to know our partners better or pick better partners when dealing with such life altering consequences.

a reply to: Hecate666

Oh stop with the moral outrage please.
I posted links to show that it is a topical issue, even with US lawmakers and posted my own completely relevant story.
I am not feeling a victim here, just inviting debate.
Have a cup of tea.

originally posted by: grainofsand

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
Sounds like a civil matter to me.

It is a criminal matter in Israel.

Well this isn't Israel, now is it?

First off, we all know that even the pill has a failure rate even if taken as recommended. Second off, do you REALLY want to tear a family apart by sending the mother of a child to jail because she lied about being on the pill? This is why I said it is a civil matter. If you REALLY want to feel wronged by this, then just sue the mother and be done with it. At least at the end of the day she still has her freedom to raise the kid.

a reply to: Kangaruex4Ewe

Thanks for the rational response.
So do you think the lawmaker in my link is full of it then, and wasting public money and time?

Maybe a new slang word and legal term needs to be coined here. I don't think it should fly as "rape" and it's not a simple con either.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Who cares about the failure rate?
My consent was solely with the understanding that an attempt at contraception was made. If the answer was "No, this is totally unprotected" then I would have not consented.
Is that such a difficult concept?

...oh, and again, I tried to make it clear in the OP but if you missed it, I'm not bitching here, just inspiring interesting mature debate about a topical issue.

originally posted by: grainofsand
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Who cares about the failure rate?
My consent was solely with the understanding that an attempt at contraception was made. If the answer was "No, this is totally unprotected" then I would have not consented.
Is that such a difficult concept?

The point is, what if she was telling the truth, and for whatever reason she still got pregnant?

...oh, and again, I tried to make it clear in the OP but if you missed it, I'm not bitching here, just inspiring interesting mature debate about a topical issue.

I got it, I'm just trying to show you the consequences of what you are proposing. It's so easy to get angry at a perceived wrong and lash out emotionally by saying "make it illegal!" but time after time, this always creates FAR more problems than it solves. How about thinking intelligently about this issue for once?

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
The point is, what if she was telling the truth, and for whatever reason she still got pregnant?

If she had been telling the truth then my consent would stand.
...risks and consequences regarding pregnancy would then be the same as any other consensual sex.